Reporters to be compelled to give evidence

Two Fairfax journalists will be compelled to give evidence about a confidential source in a banknote bribery case after a judge rejected a bid to prevent them from testifying.

The Age journalists Nick McKenzie and Richard Baker were summonsed to give evidence at a committal hearing for former executives of a Reserve Bank of Australia subsidiary allegedly involved in a bribery conspiracy to secure contracts to make plastic banknotes.

They challenged the summons but on Friday Victorian Supreme Court Justice Michael Sifris dismissed the challenge, saying lawyers for the pair had failed to demonstrate grounds for a review.

Justice Sifris said it was his job to decide if the magistrate who ordered the pair give evidence followed the law correctly, and the consequence the journalists may have to reveal their sources was not the point.

"This case is not about the protection of sources by journalists," he said.

"It is an assessment as to whether correct procedures were followed and the law was complied with, and not the substantive correctness of the ruling."

Lawyers for the journalists had argued the magistrate's ruling requiring the pair to take the witness stand was unclear.

A barrister for the journalists, Kristine Hanscombe SC, told the court earlier this month the magistrate's reasons did not shed light on how compelling the pair to testify could lead to obtaining evidence about alleged misbehaviour of investigating officers, through leaking to the media.

The summons came after an article written by the pair on December 8 last year that stated an Indonesian man had done a deal to give evidence against some of the former executives.

The article, which was published two days before closing submissions in a pre-trial committal hearing, referred to senior government sources and prosecutors.

A magistrate ordered the pair give evidence and answer the witness summons, which asked for "information regarding the source(s)" of the article and required the reporters to produce all documents relating to the article.

Justice Sifris said if the plaintiffs' sources for the article are connected with the investigation or prosecution of the case, this may strengthen the submissions of one of the executives that the charges against him should be dismissed.

After Friday's decision, Ms Hanscombe flagged the possibility of an appeal or further court action.

The Age's editor-in-chief Andrew Holden told theage.com.au the newspaper would follow its code of ethics, which holds that sources promised confidentiality must be protected at all costs.

The committal hearing is expected to resume in Melbourne Magistrates Court on February 4.

This material is subject to copyright and any unauthorised use, copying or mirroring is prohibited.